Can Brown be replaced?

I have argued in various posts that it is near impossible to replace Brown.  On Tuesday John Rentoul blogged about what Labour must do to avoid defeat.  I left a comment and then posted this.  John has now taken up my arguments here and puts his case well.

I offer these thoughts on John’s response.

1. It would be suicidal for Labour to put party before country at this time or closer to the election.  This would come over as cynical manipulation for party political advantage.  Does Labour have the appetite for such a deed?  Senior members are reported to have already given up.

2. There is much logic in John’s suggestion for a way round the complex Labour party rules.   Is it feasible?  Would the party unite under such a scenario?  How would the unions behave?

3. Then we come to Brown himself.  Surely he would have already thought all this through?  He has a track record of destroying any challenger at a stroke.  In the 2007 leadership election he made sure that no one put up a fight.  One of Brown’s options before the election could be to bring in the LibDems, giving the illusion that a coalition could beat the Tories.

4. I throw this into the pot.  If the part-privatisation of the Royal Mail fails Mandy would surely have to resign.  This would make Brown’s position untenable.  Under these circumstances the PLP may well move against him.

5. Now to the man that is causing much of the trouble.  I posted that the tragedy of Ivan's death may well have sealed the deal between Cameron and the electorate.  If this turns out be true, he is going to have an unstoppable momentum, no matter what Labour do.

I applaud John Rentoul for attempting to find a solution.  The country deserves better than to be governed by a party more interested in fratricide.